kilomentor | 17 July, 2012 14:45
At the Current Process Chemistry Conference
put on by Cambridge Healthtech Institute in Princeton, June 13-14th ,
Mathew Truppo, Process Chemistry Merck & Company, gave a talk about the
application of immobilized enzymes to synthesis using the example of the
synthesis of the diabetes II drug Januvia (sitagliptin). The use of immobilization
allowed the enzymes to be recovered and recycled efficiently and cost
effectively. Because the enzymes were easily separated this meant that
complicated separation procedures forremoving denatured enzymatic protein from the product were avoided. Because
the process was conducted by flowing the reactants past an immobilized plug of
enzyme, trapped water phase, and coenzyme there was no need to do a water
rich/organic rich phase separation or the disposal of the water-rich phase. Enzyme
and coenzyme were immobilized within a solid with structured pores that
contained the aqueous fluid.
Sitagliptin is a tertiary amide with a beta amino. It has a single centre of
chiralty at the amino bearing carbon. It is produced by stereoselective reductive amination of the
beta ketone. Dr. Truppo did not detail the particular immobilization used in
this case but from the slides it appeared that the enzyme along with a small
portion of its aqueous environment was trapped in some geometrically regular
solid pore structure. Cofactors were involved in the transformation and it was
stated or implied that these cofactors were also trapped in the immobilizing
system. He stated that getting and maintaining the correct water content was
very important. Isopropyl amine was continuously supplied in the reactant
stream. Acetone the co-product was continuously removed from the system.
This Sitagliptin talk from Dr. Truppo
blended with another presentation by Dr. Chris Savile of Codexis pertaining to Codexis’s
progress developing a systematic methodology for the evolution of improved
catalysts. Both presenters made it clear that now one could afford to use
immobilized enzymes from the very earliest stages of development all the way to
commercialization, because a client only needed to pay for incremental improvements
in the enzyme as one moved a project forward. That is to say, at the very early
stages a company like Codexis could provide an enzyme off the shelf, at competitive
cost, that could produce small amounts of material; then, when kilograms were
needed, the enzyme specialist would perform more optimization to take the enzyme improvement to a stage
where it could supply that need; and finally, if the process moved through the
clinic into manufacture, another round of refinement could be performed to
really optimize the enzyme for full production. Thus one would only need to pay
an enzyme specialist collaborator to produce a fit-for-purpose enzyme, and not suffer
a fully optimized, full price cost even for candidates that fail as drugs.
Both speakers made the point that one of the areas of cost saving was that with
immobilized enzyme processes in a flow system, scaling up was much more
predictable. For transformations where many variants of enzyme are available in
bulk synthetic chemists should now think first about the possibility to use these
enzymes.
| « | May 2013 | » | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa | Su |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
Re: Reactions on Immobilized Enzymes can Telescope Process Steps, Eliminate Isolations and Reduce Costs at All Stages of Pharmaceutical Development
steven alley | 19/07/2012, 08:36
A question on solvates. We are having problems with a crystallisation process. Some batches filter and dry nicely. Others filter nicely but form slurries in the drier (20L rotary evaporator). The batches which slurry have lower yields (by 3-5%) and form lumps which require further processing to remove.
Crystallisation temperature, cooling profile and anti-solvent addition all seem reproducible. Solvent is water. Antisolvent is IPA.
We suspect an IPA solvate is forming in the problem batches. Any suggestions on how we might approach this problem would be gratefully recieved.
newprocesschemist